Matching Items (2)
154113-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Electrophoretic exclusion is a counter-flow gradient focusing method that simultaneously separates and concentrates electrokinetic material at a channel entrance utilizing electric and fluid velocity fields. However, its effectiveness is heavily dependent on the non-uniform field gradients about the entrance. This work assesses the capability of electrophoretic exclusion to capture and

Electrophoretic exclusion is a counter-flow gradient focusing method that simultaneously separates and concentrates electrokinetic material at a channel entrance utilizing electric and fluid velocity fields. However, its effectiveness is heavily dependent on the non-uniform field gradients about the entrance. This work assesses the capability of electrophoretic exclusion to capture and enrich small molecules and examines the channel entrance region both quantitatively and qualitatively to better understand the separation dynamics for future design.

A flow injection technique is used to experimentally evaluate electrophoretic exclusion of small molecules. Methyl violet, a cationic dye, and visible spectroscopy are used to monitor flow and electrophoretic dynamics at the entrance region resulting in successful capture and simultaneous enrichment of methyl violet at the channel interface. Investigation of the entrance region is performed using both experiment data and finite element analysis modeling to assess regional flow, electric fields, diffusion, convection, and electrophoretic migration. Longitudinal fluid velocity and electric field gradient magnitudes near the channel entrance are quantified using Particle Tracking Velocimetry (PTV) and charged fluorescent microspheres. Lateral studies using rhodamine 123 concentration monitoring agree qualitatively with simulation results indicating decreased gradient uniformity for both electric and fluid velocity fields closer to the channel wall resulting in a localized concentration enhancement at lower applied voltages than previously observed or predicted. Resolution interrogation from both a theoretical assessment and simulation construct demonstrate resolution improvement with decreased channel width and placement of an electrode directly at the interface. Simulation resolution predictions are in general agreement with early experimental assessments, both suggesting species with electrophoretic mobilities as similar as 10-9 m2/(Vs) can be separated with the current design. These studies have helped evolve the understanding of the interface region and set the foundation for further interface developments.
ContributorsKeebaugh, Michael (Author) / Hayes, Mark (Thesis advisor) / Ros, Alexandra (Committee member) / Buttry, Daniel (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
129433-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Electrophoretic exclusion, a technique that differentiates species in bulk solution near a channel entrance, has been demonstrated on benchtop and microdevice designs. In these systems, separation occurs when the electrophoretic velocity of one species is greater than the opposing hydrodynamic flow, while the velocity of the other species is less

Electrophoretic exclusion, a technique that differentiates species in bulk solution near a channel entrance, has been demonstrated on benchtop and microdevice designs. In these systems, separation occurs when the electrophoretic velocity of one species is greater than the opposing hydrodynamic flow, while the velocity of the other species is less than that flow. Although exclusion has been demonstrated in multiple systems for a range of analytes, a theoretical assessment of resolution has not been addressed. To compare the results of these calculations to traditional techniques, the performance is expressed in terms of smallest difference in electrophoretic mobilities that can be completely separated (R = 1.5). The calculations indicate that closest resolvable species (Δμc) differ by approximately 10-13 m2/Vs and peak capacity (nc) is 1000. Published experimental data were compared to these calculated results.

ContributorsKenyon, Stacy (Author) / Keebaugh, Michael (Author) / Hayes, Mark (Author) / Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry (Contributor)
Created2014-09-01